Shopping Cart (0) items Sign In

Construction Claims Monthly - Devoted exclusively to the problems of construction contracting since 1963

‹ Prev article: 
 

Verbal Directive For Extrawork Mustaccompanyagreement To Pay

Thursday, September 01, 2011 07:26 am

 

Extra Work

First General Constr. Corp., Inc. v. Kasco Constr. Co., Inc., 2011 U.S. Dist. Lexis 55349 (D. Pa. May 24, 2011)

A sub demanded compensation for extra work it claimed the contractor verbally ordered. But the contractor claimed it didn't know the sub considered that work outside the contract scope or expected additional pay for the work.

First General Construction Corp.(FGCC) sued Kasco Construction Co., Inc. (Kasco) for contract breach, quantum meruit, unjust enrichment and failure to pay promptly. Kasco was the general contractor on a Marlton, New Jersey shopping center expansion project owned by Vornado Realty Trust (Vornado). FGCC was the concrete subcontractor. Kasco counter-sued, claiming that FGCC failed to submit invoices for any alleged extra work, which deprived Kasco of its ability to get paid for that work by Vornado.

FGCC argued that despite the written contract between it and Kasco, it could make unjust enrichment and quantum meruit claims for its extra work because that work was approved verbally, performed and then accepted. To support this argument, the sub cited Universal Builders, Inc. v. Moon Motor Lodge, Inc., 430 Pa. 550, 244 A.2d 10 (Pa. 1968). There, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court refused to enforce a contract provision requiring that extra work be allowed only under a written change order because the owner had verbally requested the work, promis[...]

 
› Next article: 
 
Sign up now for Construction Claims Monthly Online! Your own virtual help desk of must-have techniques, tutorials, and how-to articles.
 
Join Now Construction Claims Monthly! Close